This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Turner, B. S. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Cosmopolitan Virtue: On Religion in a Global Age

UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE, UK

The sociological debate about globalization has often neglected the place of religion in a global age. This absence is problematic, given the creative role of the world religions in the shaping of the modernization and globalization processes. This article treats globalization as a particular phase of the general process of modernity, and considers religion in terms of four paradoxes. The first (the Nietzsche paradox) argues that, against the received wisdom, fundamentalism is a form of modernization. Although religious fundamentalism may be a reaction to the hybridity brought about by globalization, it is not a traditional reaction. The second (the Parsonian paradox) argues that modernization and globalization constitute religion as a special and separate institutional sphere of society, and hence transform religion into a problem of modernity. Fundamentalism attempts to reverse this pattern and, in the marginal societies of the global system, fundamentalist religion challenges this western version of modernized religion. The third (the McLuhan paradox) is that religious values in a global village expose the incommensurability of cultural systems, but relativism is not easily sustained in practice and globalization paradoxically increases the need for human rights universalism. While nationalism as a framework for cultures conflicts with attempts to develop general systems of rights discourse, it is not evident that the creation of alternative rights systems (such as Confucian codes) appears to be immediately viable. The final (the Montaigne paradox) explores the contradiction between Orientalism as a necessary consequence of the discovery of Otherness and Otherness as a necessary experience of cosmopolitan humanism. The article concludes with a discussion of the possibilities of cosmopolitan virtue in the context of these paradoxes of globalization and religion.

Key Words: cosmopolitanism • fundamentalism • globalization • modernity • secularization

European Journal of Social Theory, Vol. 4, No. 2, 131-152 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/13684310122225046


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. McLennan Towards Postsecular Sociology? Sociology, October 1, 2007; 41(5): 857 - 870. [Abstract] [PDF]

				W. Smith Cosmopolitan Citizenship: Virtue, Irony and Worldliness European Journal of Social Theory, February 1, 2007; 10(1): 37 - 52. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. S. Turner Cosmopolitan Virtue, Globalization and Patriotism Theory Culture Society, April 1, 2002; 19(1-2): 45 - 63. [Abstract] [PDF]